Disposed

Chandra Praksh Tripathi v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC11 Dec 2024A482/9499/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 CrPC (referred to as s. 482) seeking quashing of proceedings, the court heard arguments regarding a family dispute over ancestral property and pending civil litigation, observed the matter requires consideration, and stayed proceedings while issuing notice to respondent no. 2.

What did the court decide?

Impugned proceedings stayed pending issue of notice to respondent no. 2 and next hearing in February 2025.

Chandra Praksh Tripathi vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another — Allahabad HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Court No. - 13

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9499 of 2024

¶3

Applicant :- Chandra Praksh Tripathi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another

¶4

Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Bajpai,Abhishek Kumar,Belal Ahmad

¶5

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶7

Supplementary affidavit filed by the learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶9

The present application has been filed with a prayer to quash the charge sheet dated 09.03.2024 as well as entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 47574 of 2024 arising out of F.I.R. No. 530 of 2023, under Sections 427, 452, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Gazipur, District Lucknow.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the property was purchased by him from the owner of the property in question, but thereafter, due to family dispute, only with the intention to make pressure on the applicant, the daughter-in-law (wife of son of the brother of the applicant) lodged the F.I.R. No. 530 of 2023 (supra). It is vehemently submitted that civil suits in relation to the property in question are already pending in between the parties. It is, thus, submitted that the indulgence of this Court is necessary.

¶11

Learned A.G.A., on the other hand, submits that there are sufficient evidences related to the altercation in between the parties. However, at this stage, on the basis of the enclosures, she does not dispute the pendency of civil suit in between the parties.

¶12

Considering the arguments advances by the learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and going through

¶13

the contents of the application, F.I.R. as well as other relevant documents, including the supplementary affidavit filed today, it is evident that the applicant as well as opposite party belong to same family and the property in question is ancestral property. It is also evident that civil suit is still pending in between the parties.

¶14

In view of above facts and circumstances, the matter requires consideration.

¶15

Issue notice to respondent no. 2.

¶16

List this case in the month of February, 2025.

¶17

Until further orders of this Court, impugned proceedings shall remain stayed.

¶18

Order Date :- 11.12.2024 VKS

¶19

Digitally signed by :- VIVEK KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Chandra Praksh Tripathi v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandra Praksh Tripathi v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

X- Juvenile vs State of Up and 3 Others

state of up vs Hazi Irfan Solanki and 2 Others

Ranjeet vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 4 Others

Quraisha Bano and Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Another

Ramchandra and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

X- Juvenile vs State of U.P. and Another